It is surprising to me that there us no thread for this yet (at least not one that I have found) so I decided to make one here. The main purpose of this thread should be to discuss opinions, motives, effects, ethicality, etc. on the Occupy Wall Street movement, along with other Occupy movements.
----------------------------
Now for my personal opinion. I am all for the motive, but the means (such as the shutdown of bridges, causing reduction of transportation) are questionable.
I think that shutting down bridges is not an ethical way to go about a protest. However, being the first major global protest with this kind of purpose, this might have been the only option for OWS to gain notoriety.
Since I have been researching heavily into this, I am willing to answer any questions about the means and motive of the protests, along with explaining political terminology.
The last bail out was for Bank of America was for $142.2 billion. Let's see here how could you help the economy with $142.2 billion... Let's see... With only one billion..
Start multiple industries. Idk the possibilities are ENDLESS. and that's just with 1 billion. now imagine that X147.2. If you think bailouts are good for the economy compared to other options. And that's not even the largest amount if you look at my link at the top.
The #occupy people do not understand basic economy. They think if they bring down Wall street, and thus disrupting trade, will help the economy. I fail to see it happening
f you think bailouts are good for the economy compared to other options.
Now let us see the damage done to the economy if the bailouts weren't passed.
Their findings: âEffects on real Gross Domestic Product, jobs and inflation are huge, and probably averted what could have been called Great Depression 2.0. For example, we estimate that, without the governmentâs response, GDP in 2010 would be about 6.5 percent lower, payroll employment would be less by some 8.5 million jobs, and the nation would now be experiencing deflation.â
http://midwestdemocracyproject.org/articles/new-report-shows-how-government-bailouts-stimulus-helped-the-economy/ Is this your source? For there are too many links to this source. And what is wrong with a little bit of deflation? We inflate are money supplies everyday. Day after day it keeps getting worse. Alternatives? Here's from NPR. You can listen to it if you would like. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95026117 I can keep going on but after every fall we get stronger. Don't believe me? Just look at where we were after FDR. After he put America to work we grew again. Bailouts are not the answer. Bailouts are what the banks want not the economy.
Is this your source? For there are too many links to this source.
It isn't.
And what is wrong with a little bit of deflation? We inflate are money supplies everyday. Day after day it keeps getting worse.
Inflation is not the main problem. Unemployment and the decrease of GDP is.
I can keep going on but after every fall we get stronger. Don't believe me? Just look at where we were after FDR. After he put America to work we grew again. Bailouts are not the answer. Bailouts are what the banks want not the economy.
You can't compare wholly with an era where financial services wasn't the main part of the economy. If the banks fail now, where will people get the money to spend, invest, etc etc. Wait?
You can't compare wholly with an era where financial services wasn't the main part of the economy. If the banks fail now, where will people get the money to spend, invest, etc etc. Wait?
The Fed. The institution that is a bank itself but will probably never be able to collapse. Also this is the problem with making money out of thin air. It all needs to that money is actually worth only what the treasury owes other people. Just search money is debt and read up unless you passed high school then you should already know about this.
The Fed. The institution that is a bank itself but will probably never be able to collapse. Also this is the problem with making money out of thin air. It all needs to that money is actually worth only what the treasury owes other people. Just search money is debt and read up unless you passed high school then you should already know about this.
I study economics.
Now you're going to allow just one bank to monopolise the system? Wow.
Also this is the problem with making money out of thin air. It all needs to that money is actually worth only what the treasury owes other people.
This explains it pretty well. http://www.reallyneatstuffalaska.com/modern_money_mechanics
I study economics.
Economy is a broad subject so that doesn't matter unless you say exactly what you study as in subject.
Finally
[quote]The Fed. The institution that is a bank itself but will probably never be able to collapse. Also this is the problem with making money out of thin air. It all needs to that money is actually worth only what the treasury owes other people. Just search money is debt and read up unless you passed high school then you should already know about this.
Now you're going to allow just one bank to monopolise the system? Wow. [/quote] NO you said where would the people(as in people who are desperate go to get money. I said probably the Fed. Now you threw the straw man up by assuming that I want a monopoly. I don't want a monopoly I want a lot of different banks which would drive debt interest down. But to bailout a bank instead of buying their bad assets.(which can be a lot cheaper, yet save a bank)
The occupy Wall Street movement is basically a bad idea. The world needs to go through a period of deleveraging in which GDP growth will be less, debt will gradually go down, and the economy will be relatively stagnant. Why? Most conutries especially the PIIGS, Japan, U.S., etc. have lots of debt (Japan's is over 100% of GDP). This peiod of deleveraging will be harsh but beneficial (people will sped less, businesses will be more efficient, bloated ocmpanies can be allowed to go bankrupt). The only way to do this is to lower taxes, veer away from socialism, and cut governemnt programs such as Universal Health Care, Social Security, and the war in Iraq. Socialism has been tested and it is known to not work well. Then, let nature take its ccourse...As for the problem of inflation? Well, because the money multiplier effect (banks not lending)is not exactly working, inflation is somewhat overhyped. The mian ide is to slim the economy and increase the competitiveness of our businesses.
I'm not going to argue that higher taxes makes the economy weaker and that will make it harder for us to get out of the crisis, but I think that a little more socialism BEFORE the crisis could have helped us avoiding it, since it was caused by national debt and too few independent controls on loan reliability.
True true, but free market forces correct themselves. Socialism was what got us into the mess we are in today though. The government's macroeconomic policies (like lower interest rates) made in the mid 1900s tamed recessions and nearly eliminated depressions. This unnatural contol over the economy gave the world a false sense of security. Because of this sense of security, the eventual collapse, the recession started 2008-2009, will be worse than previous recessions. Because we humans cannot understand the consequences of our actions (macroeconomics is a relatively new subject), we should avoid socialism to aviod cosequences like this. The best option now is to let everything slide the best we can. A good analogy is forest fires. A lot of smaller frequent fires is better than a massive fire caused after there had been no fires for a long time (the dead underbrush unconsumed by previous fires will aggravate the situation).
I am not certain The Occupy Wall Street movement is the smartest move to see change economically.
it's not just an economic change that is trying to be made. It has to do with the way the government is in the back pockets of these businesses as well.
I think it is just a bunch of hippies living up to their stereotype.
